Jolt Country

Pretty great Spirit of the Stairs here.

AArdvark wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 3:00 am What did the old man say to the policeman to get himself pushed to the ground? There doesn't seem to be any kind of recording of that.

Just ask Trump! Apparently, "Antifa" has learned how to change the laws of physics, and this guy's his cell phone was a piece of sooper seekrit anti-police technology!

AArdvark wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:21 pm Sure, the police certainly could have acted in a less aggressive fashion, I get that. There was no need to push the guy, there could have been a peaceful outcome.

But let me put some spin on it. The old man didn't have to stay there. He could have seen the danger he was confronting and left before he was ever in pushing range.---

That's right, blame the victim. I guess when Brianna Taylor's boyfriend saw a bunch of armed men with no uniforms bust down their door like a home invasion, (rather than a no-knock warrant) he shouldn't have shot at them, then she wouldn't have been shot and killed (as opposed to maybe raped and killed if they were home invaders). I mean, the couple should have known having narcotics was liable to cause police to come looking. Oh, wait, there were no narcotics found, the police fucked up? Oh, too bad.

AArdvark wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:21 pm Think of it as a force of nature (it's not, but imagine that it is for a moment) You don't protest a hurricane for moving inland and wrecking everything. You get the hell out of there. Hurricanes are dangerous.

Yeah, but a hurricane is exactly that, a force of nature, sometimes referred to as an "act of God" or "force majure". It's a mindless mass of energy. Police officers are supposed to be trained professionals, who are supposed to know that dealing with civilians can potentially get confrontational.

There is a video of a state trooper giving a driver an expensive ticket for something, and the man went completely ballistic, cursing, screaming and crying about the $150 ticket, and the trooper acted like the consummate professional we expect, he just stood there, as if this was just something he had to put up with, which it was. His only response was, when the man got mad, tore up his copy of the ticket, and threw pieces out his window, the Trooper stepped back (probably so the man oud open his door), and calmly said, "You need to pick these up, sir, or I'm going to have to cite you for littering." The man, clearly upset, got out, did so, then drove off. The trooper never raised his voice.

This is what we should expect, consummate professionalism.

AArdvark wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:21 pm A gang of men are dangerous, no matter if it's Hell's Angels with sawed off billiard cues or police with badges and riot gear.

Hells angels are a bunh of untrained thugs. Police are supposed to be trained in dealing with people. If they don't know how, they have no business being on the street.

AArdvark wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:21 pm The danger is there. No amount of words written on paper will protect you from a gang of men.

If the police are a mere "gang of men," then they xhould damn well be disbnaded and replaced by trained people. If they are thugs, they are no service to the commun8ity.

AArdvark wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:21 pm It should not be like that except... men are men. A gang of men is halfway (or more) to jungle law. Recognising that before a confrontation happens will save you a lot of hurt.

'Vark, I understand your point. Except they were wearing uniforms identifying them as police officers. This means we are supposed to expect that they act in accordance with the requirements imposed on them. Police have special privileges including the ability to use deadly force if necessary, but they aren't supposed to just use it willy-nilly. Police have more leeway to use force (including deadly force) than civiliians, precisely because they are trained in when they are, and are not, allowed to use it.

AArdvark wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:21 pm The man didn't recognise the danger he was in, he thought the law of peaceful protest would protect him and he was wrong.

In a way, it did. The cop that shoved him is probably going to get fired for excessive force, and I wouldn't be surprised if the city has an expensive settlement with the guy. And maybe cleans up its riot control rules.

I mean, even in the movie Soylent Green, when food ran out, and the cops knew there would be food riots, they at least announced over bullhorns that "the supply of Soylent Green has been exhausted" and if the people there didn't leave, protesters would be forcibly removed, by unceremoniously scooping them up and dumping them in the back of dump trucks, then released a little later. (They're not going to arrest or hold them, because then they'd have to feed them.)

Here, Buffalo Police just shoved people (or at least him) without warning. As noted, this was clearly misconduct. The public does not get mad at a hurricane, because it doesn't know any better. Police and Hells Angels are supposed to know better, but the difference is, police are expected to be better than a lawless mob, and if they aren't, fire them all and get better trained people.

Trading the horror of civil unrest and potentially '"The Purge" for the horror of lawless men with guns and badges is not really much of an improvement. Or maybe it's exactly the same. I remember a line from the movie Billy Jack: "When policemen break the law, then there isn't any law - just a fight for survival."

That's right, blame the victim

I'm not blaming anyone. I said there could have been a peaceful resolution to the incident.

Think of it as a force of nature

That means use your imagination

Police are supposed to be...

"Supposed to be" is called wishful thinking.

This means we are supposed to expect...

Police and Hells Angels are supposed to know better...

This is what we should expect, consummate professionalism...

There you go with the wishful thinking again

police are expected to be better than a lawless mob, and if they aren't, fire them all and get better trained people.

Would that it were so

"When policemen break the law, then there isn't any law - just a fight for survival."

(points index finger in the air!) Which is pretty much my point about getting out of harm's way

If we all accept misery then how will it ever get better?

AArdvark wrote: Fri Jun 12, 2020 3:40 pm

That's right, blame the victim

I'm not blaming anyone. I said there could have been a peaceful resolution to the incident.

Yeah, the police could have done their jobs, which means to maintain order, not to beat up people who have not committed a crime nor breached the peace.

AArdvark wrote: Fri Jun 12, 2020 3:40 pm

"When policemen break the law, then there isn't any law - just a fight for survival."

(points index finger in the air!) Which is pretty much my point about getting out of harm's way

When the police are "harms way," that's when the social contract is broken. Once the general public realizes it, "that's game over man, game over."

The Happiness Engine wrote: Fri Jun 12, 2020 7:28 pm If we all accept misery then how will it ever get better?

Well, one of two things. If people believe the social contract is still valid, and speaking to public officials will make a difference to get change and peaceful protests can continue, then things will change, slowly, and violence need not happen.

John F. Kennedy identified what happens if not. "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

But if peaceful protests are broken violently, and/or real changes to police practices are not made, this means the social contract is broken, and then they'll start killing cops, but not when they're in riot gear. No, five or six will trail a supervisor or a particularly nasty cop, follow them home, then when he (or she) opens their door, it's busted in, masked people come in, the officer is told to kneel, and he's shot in the back of the head, execution style, blowing his brains out in front of his family.

So maybe they send in National Guard troops. They can't be everywhere, and if it doesn't stop misconduct, maybe they also have to watch out for snipers using remote-controlled rifles. Once people consider that it's open season on them, they'll respond in ugly ways. Maybe taking hostages. We have never had an uprising against civil authority. Hope we never do. It is not going to be pretty. The nastier the police or other authorities have acted, the worse the blowback could be.

the police could have done their jobs

And the man chose to stand near them, like having a hurricane party

This man is a brilliant man. I *HIGHLY* recommend not just this video but all of his many recent videos, each one about a current race issue. His is extremely well-educated, well-spoken, has a deep knowledge of history, and each one nails the topic *perfectly*. They are in plain English and aren't very long, either - a great for sending to people who don't get it. This one is about the confederate flag, but he has a whole slew more about recent events. Well worth the few minutes to watch each one. "Like and subscribe!"

Confederate flags and the new south


How I learned to Love MAGA Hats:

Finsternis wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:08 am This man is a brilliant man. I *HIGHLY* recommend not just this video but all of his many recent videos,

You've actually found something useful, thank you. I'll add my stamp of approval to Finsternis'. by mentioning that the man - whose name is Bo - has done three excellent videos on guns and gun control, why most gun control proposals don't work, why we're now having all these school shootings, and what we can do about the problem.

If you watch, watch in order 1, 2, and 3. It's about 35 minutes total. There are additional points below, after the videos.

Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:

He also mentioned both something I knew, and something I'd never thought about.

Thi is the part I knew, and these are (mostly) my comments.

What is the purpose of the Second Amendment? It has three parts. but the first thing is, what is 'the militia' as the Second Amendment? Generally it means every citizen from 18 to 55, the entire populace, almost all of us.

The first purpose of the Second Amendment - which almost never happens any more - is if the militia is called up to put down insurrections, like rebellions. The police or "the organized militia" (your state's National Guard or State Guard, if it has one) do that now, and if real bad, the army.

The Second and third purposes of the Second Amendment are, if things go bad, for the militia to shoot and kill government employees.

The second purpose of the Second Amendment is to shoot and kill government employees of another country, if we were invaded.

The third purpose of the Second Amendment is the one people don't like to talk about. In the event of this government - state and/or federal - becoming tyrannical, to shoot and kill those involved. That literally means killing police officers and soldiers. Sure, police have riot gear and soldiers have all kinds of military hardware to protect them, but unless they are going to stay in bunkers 24 hours a day and only travel in armored vehicles, sooner or later they are exposed. And unless they are willing to bomb civilian targets including hospitals and schools, and have their families in bunkers 24/7, it's very difficult to fight a guerilla army.

Now this was Bo's point: Those who claim to be 'law abiding gun owners' are the problem. You could have had 'law abiding gun owners' do nothing in Germany as Jews were herded into ghettos and gas chambers. The second Amendment is there to protect your ability to respond on the day you can no longer remain a 'law abiding gun owner.'

Tdarcos wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:37 pmI'll add my stamp of approval to Finsternis.

It's a little late for that, ICJ broke him like a keyboard. But...if you want I can play the part of Finsternis for you while you get it all out of your system:

Tdarcos wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:37 pm

Finsternis wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:08 am

This man is a brilliant man. I *HIGHLY* recommend not just this video but all of his many recent videos,

You've actually found something useful, thank you.
[/quote][/quote]

YOU NEVER UNDERSTAND what I'm saying oink oink because you're stupid oink oink and I'm smart oink oink. I can treat you like an ass oink oink because ICJ will never oink oink ban me oink oink because I understand things better oink oink than everyone else. You Dummy! oink oink.

Tdarcos wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:37 pmThe first purpose of the Second Amendment

[/quote][/quote]

OINK OINK OINK!!!!!!!!

Tdarcos wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:37 pm

The second purpose

OINK OINK OINK!!!!!!!!

Tdarcos wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:37 pmThe third purpose of the Second Amendment

OINK OINK OINK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tdarcos wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:37 pmI'll add my stamp of approval to Finsternis.

It's a little late for that, ICJ broke him like a keyboard. But...if you want I can play the part of Finsternis for you while you get it all out of your system:

Tdarcos wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:37 pm

Finsternis wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:08 am

This man is a brilliant man. I *HIGHLY* recommend not just this video but all of his many recent videos,

You've actually found something useful, thank you.

[/quote]

YOU NEVER UNDERSTAND what I'm saying oink oink because you're stupid oink oink and I'm smart oink oink. I can treat you like an ass oink oink because ICJ will never oink oink ban me oink oink because I understand things better oink oink than everyone else. You Dummy! oink oink.

Tdarcos wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:37 pmThe first purpose of the Second Amendment

[/quote][/quote]

OINK OINK OINK!!!!!!!!

Tdarcos wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:37 pm

The second purpose

OINK OINK OINK!!!!!!!!

Tdarcos wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:37 pmThe third purpose of the Second Amendment

OINK OINK OINK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

____________________

Let me know if there is anything else I can do for you.

That was brilliant. Well done, Billy.

pinback wrote: Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:35 am That was brilliant. Well done, Billy.

Thank you. The first two things that came to mind regarding Finsternis is that he is a fat pig and he doesn't understand how to quote posts. I just ran with that, glad you liked it.

Billy, you were hilarious and your respose was brilliant. Since you're playing Finsternis, go fuck yourself. Or maybe, since you're playing Finsternis, go play with yourself.

Tdarcos wrote: Mon Jun 15, 2020 2:10 pmSince you're playing Finsternis, go fuck yourself. Or maybe, since you're playing Finsternis, go play with yourself.

HAHA! You got him good, Big Blue!!

My Doom 2 mod from 2000 has “nazi cop” enemies if anyone has some issues to work out.

AArdvark wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:21 pm Sure, the police certainly could have acted in a less aggressive fashion, I get that. There was no need to push the guy, there could have been a peaceful outcome.

But let me put some spin on it....

Who was behind the TSummary account? We need them back!

RetroRomper wrote: Tue Jun 16, 2020 4:26 am Who was behind the TSummary account?

pinback

RetroRomper wrote: Tue Jun 16, 2020 4:26 amWe need them back!

He still posts here.

Billy Mays wrote: Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:29 am

RetroRomper wrote: Tue Jun 16, 2020 4:26 am Who was behind the TSummary account?

pinback

Incorrect.

Here is another really great video from Beau (I had his name as Bo) and he explains why cops kill the wrong people because the officers are breaking the three fundamental rules of a police-civilian encounter. He also shows how officers can avoid incidents that might get them killed. When you hear him, you'll be wondering how come every cop doesn't know these things. Very entertaining and informational.